I too have survivorship bias that I try to explain away with self serving theories and ideas that pit my special nature against the tendencies of the inferior masses. In my case I literally survived alcoholism after I was lucky enough to come out alive after an accident. I used this as motivation to do the hard work of getting and staying sober. My brain sometimes tells me that I have some special power of “working hard enough to change myself” that has also helped me become an entrepreneur and make other positive changes in my life. I tell myself people sometimes fail because they didn’t go through this and can’t work hard enough to change themselves for the better. In reality it all comes down to luck and circumstance that I was fortunate enough to take advantage of.
In this post the author tries to set up an unassailable scenario where two very similar people end up with strikingly different life outcomes because of “how some of us have chosen to live their lives.” Conveniently, the author is the successful one because he is part of “a small set of humans who don’t act like their lives are predestined.” The majority, and the person he compares himself to, obviously couldn’t succeed without this special character aspect. In reality, it’s the “small set of humans” part that shows the way to the truth. The analysis that says successful people are different because they chose to act differently and not live a “predestined” life ignores all the people who also made that choice without getting lucky and achieving success. It also leaves out the people who lived a “predestined” life and succeeded despite their lack of willpower or special abilities or whatever else we can point to as an explanation.
Like I said, I am victim to the same fallacies in my own reasoning about my life, but I try very hard to overcome them or at least recognize them. The takeaway from this article isn’t that “you are the master of your own fate” but instead something like “be careful when trying to explain your own life’s circumstances, especially when your explanations put you in some special class that only few people have achieved.” Luck, by its very nature, is only for the few.
"But what we know with certainty is that there is a small set of humans who don’t act like their lives are predestined. For better or worse, regardless of circumstances, country or culture they struggle their entire lives wanting to change the outcome. And a small percentage of these translate the “wanting to change” into acting on it. This small group is dissatisfied with waiting for life to hand them their path. They act, they do, they move, they change things."
Oh! I wish I could live by the storytelling and narrative that this gentleman does!
He thinks there is no such thing of a predestined life but he is actually predestined to think that way. And then he blames those who are not predestined and forces them to work in an Amazon warehouse and sleep in their car.
Look at his sprawling estate he wants us all to see right there at the top of his blog! His ego!
It sounds like his friend Glen is the guy I want to be around, ans Steve seems to think that it might not have been lucky for him that "we were both sent to bases in different parts of the U.S."
This is the equation I will leave you with.
Success = hard work + Luck
Luck is an uncontrolled variable, so success is uncontrollable. If anyone can refute that logic please do so.
You are mostly correct, but the “Luck” factor has a hidden variable in it: The ability to see and notice when you are lucky, often called “optimism”. If you are pessimistic, you will not notice when a lucky break happens, and the opportunity will pass you by, but you will erroneously blame your lack of success to your lack of luck, not your pessimism.
An optimist's life is still subject to roll of the dice. To say pessimist's do not notice luck is utterly foolish. In fact, I would say they cherish it more than the optimist who thinks thing swill always work out for the best.
I am neither optimist or pessimist. I only know that I should not use my luck to rule over the less lucky.
Well, yes. I phrased it that way intentionally. It can even be negative.
But, we always have a choice to play a different game, with different parameters. That's actually where the recognition of opportunity comes into play even more strongly.
I too have survivorship bias that I try to explain away with self serving theories and ideas that pit my special nature against the tendencies of the inferior masses. In my case I literally survived alcoholism after I was lucky enough to come out alive after an accident. I used this as motivation to do the hard work of getting and staying sober. My brain sometimes tells me that I have some special power of “working hard enough to change myself” that has also helped me become an entrepreneur and make other positive changes in my life. I tell myself people sometimes fail because they didn’t go through this and can’t work hard enough to change themselves for the better. In reality it all comes down to luck and circumstance that I was fortunate enough to take advantage of.
In this post the author tries to set up an unassailable scenario where two very similar people end up with strikingly different life outcomes because of “how some of us have chosen to live their lives.” Conveniently, the author is the successful one because he is part of “a small set of humans who don’t act like their lives are predestined.” The majority, and the person he compares himself to, obviously couldn’t succeed without this special character aspect. In reality, it’s the “small set of humans” part that shows the way to the truth. The analysis that says successful people are different because they chose to act differently and not live a “predestined” life ignores all the people who also made that choice without getting lucky and achieving success. It also leaves out the people who lived a “predestined” life and succeeded despite their lack of willpower or special abilities or whatever else we can point to as an explanation.
Like I said, I am victim to the same fallacies in my own reasoning about my life, but I try very hard to overcome them or at least recognize them. The takeaway from this article isn’t that “you are the master of your own fate” but instead something like “be careful when trying to explain your own life’s circumstances, especially when your explanations put you in some special class that only few people have achieved.” Luck, by its very nature, is only for the few.
"But what we know with certainty is that there is a small set of humans who don’t act like their lives are predestined. For better or worse, regardless of circumstances, country or culture they struggle their entire lives wanting to change the outcome. And a small percentage of these translate the “wanting to change” into acting on it. This small group is dissatisfied with waiting for life to hand them their path. They act, they do, they move, they change things."
Oh! I wish I could live by the storytelling and narrative that this gentleman does!
He thinks there is no such thing of a predestined life but he is actually predestined to think that way. And then he blames those who are not predestined and forces them to work in an Amazon warehouse and sleep in their car.
Look at his sprawling estate he wants us all to see right there at the top of his blog! His ego!
It sounds like his friend Glen is the guy I want to be around, ans Steve seems to think that it might not have been lucky for him that "we were both sent to bases in different parts of the U.S."
This is the equation I will leave you with.
Success = hard work + Luck
Luck is an uncontrolled variable, so success is uncontrollable. If anyone can refute that logic please do so.
You are mostly correct, but the “Luck” factor has a hidden variable in it: The ability to see and notice when you are lucky, often called “optimism”. If you are pessimistic, you will not notice when a lucky break happens, and the opportunity will pass you by, but you will erroneously blame your lack of success to your lack of luck, not your pessimism.
An optimist's life is still subject to roll of the dice. To say pessimist's do not notice luck is utterly foolish. In fact, I would say they cherish it more than the optimist who thinks thing swill always work out for the best.
I am neither optimist or pessimist. I only know that I should not use my luck to rule over the less lucky.
Agree with this. Also luck is a multiplier, not summative.
Success = Hard work * Luck * Recognition of opportunity
Success=100 * 0 * 100=ZERO
All your success depends on the luck you have. And luck is uncontrollable and unknowable, so nothing you do changes the chances of your success
Well, yes. I phrased it that way intentionally. It can even be negative.
But, we always have a choice to play a different game, with different parameters. That's actually where the recognition of opportunity comes into play even more strongly.
[flagged]